On This Page

Filter

These are the filters currently being used to limit the search results. Click on the
icon to remove the filter.

max date

2018-11-09

hansard heading

EU External Trade: USA

max answer › date of answer

2019-05-17

Sort by

This list shows the properties that you can sort by. Click on to sort in ascending order and to sort in descending order. The properties that you're currently sorting by are
shown at the top of the list. Click on to remove a sort and or to reverse the current sort order. Click on the icon to remove all the sorting. Note that sorting can significantly slow down the
loading of the page.

View

Choose what information you want to view about each item. There are some pre-defined
views, but starred properties are always present no matter what the view. You can
star properties by clicking on the icon. The currently starred icons have a icon; clicking on it will unstar the property.

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, on what occasions
have (a) EU companies seeking to trade in the US and (b) US companies seeking to trade
in the EU claimed to have been discriminated against by the courts of the host nation
in the last five years.

<p>Claims made by EU investors in third countries or vice versa may be made in a wide
range of situations in which the UK government is not involved and about which it
does not have access to relevant information.</p>

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, in which countries
in the proposed TTIP trading bloc domestic courts have failed to provide compensation
to foreign corporations whose property has been unfairly confiscated or whose contracts
have been unfairly terminated; and what the reasons were for compensation not having
been given.

<p>The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills does not routinely hold information
on, or assess the fairness or otherwise of, the compensation decisions of courts in
other countries except for individual cases that are brought to our attention by British
companies.</p>

<p>The Government is deeply disappointed at the imposition of tariffs on the EU for
the export of steel and aluminium.</p><p><br>It is right to seek to defend our domestic
industries from the damaging direct and indirect impacts of these US tariffs. The
government has worked closely with the EU as part of our unified response. The response
must be measured, proportionate and within the boundaries of the rules-based trading
system, of which the UK is a strong advocate.</p>

<p>Increased tariffs can have damaging impacts on our domestic industries as well
as on consumers. Further escalation of trade tensions between the EU and US would
be damaging to both the EU and US economies.</p><p>The Government has been engaging
directly with the US administration, including through 5 Ministerial visits to the
US, meetings with senior administration figures and the recent visit of President
Trump to the UK.</p><p>We welcome the agreement between President Juncker and President
Trump to open negotiations to avoid further escalation that would harm businesses
and consumers.</p>

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will give
a formal response to the report published by LSE Enterprise entitled, Costs and Benefits
of an EU-US Investment Protection Treaty.

<p> </p><p>The purpose of an investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism in
an investment protection agreement is to provide an independent process for foreign
investors to seek compensation where they believe they have suffered a loss as a result
of action by the host state which breaches the provisions of the treaty. ISDS provisions
can help to create a positive investment climate and promote growth. As such, ISDS
will not have a direct impact on consumers, who will benefit from other elements of
the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and who have separate routes
for seeking redress. The UK currently has over 90 investment protection agreements
with other countries. While a number of UK businesses have used ISDS to seek compensation,
there has been no successful action against the UK in respect of any of these agreements.
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has commissioned research into
investment protection agreements and the ISDS mechanism, reviewed academic research,
consulted external experts and carried out its own internal analysis on investment
provisions. The ISDS provisions in TTIP are still under negotiation. We believe these
provisions must strike the right balance between protecting investors and the host
nation’s right to regulate and determine policy. Balanced investment protection provisions
in TTIP could act as a model for future trade and investment agreements.</p><p> </p><p>
</p><p> </p><p>I am not aware of having received any representations from South Africa,
Ecuador, India and Indonesia on investor state dispute settlement in the TTIP negotiations.</p><p>
</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>